--- Scott Schultz <scott at cjhunter.com> wrote: > > I've suggested before that the animal genes don't actually > > affect the Dragaeran development; they are merely there as markers. > > Aliera merely mentions the presence of the genes; she doesn't > > go into how, or even if, they affect Dragaerans. > > I think we have ample evidence that the animal genes DO have an effect. > The > courage of the Dzur, the ferocity of the Dragon, the subtlety of the > Yendi.. > These things are "built-in" to each member of that House. They aren't > merely > social constructs. They're an essential trait the members of that House > are > born with to a greater or lesser extent. If the genes themselves were > just > markers, then the Houses would eventually become homogenized, with only > a > few exceptional members of a House being talented enough to give more > than > lip service to that House's "gimmick". I agree that the characteristics of each House are genetic, but nothing says that those characteristics come from the *animal* genes that are built in. Could issola possibly have genes for courtliness, jhegaala for shifting (as distinct from a fixed sequence of metamorphoses), or yendi for trickery? I prefer the theory that the animal genes are markers and the Jenoine gengineered the Orca to like the sea without using orca genes. (The orca don't have to be attracted to the sea--they're stuck there.) Jerry Friedman __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail